BUT OUR GOVERNMENT NEEDS ACCESS TO YOUR E-MAILS TO KEEP US SAFE!

Complete, total, utter bullshit, lies.  How’s that sound.

The NSA could have installed its tapping gear only at the nation’s “landing stations” where fiber-optic cables come ashore.  If the NSA would have limited its eaves-dropping to just international communications, which at the time was all that was allowed under US law, they would have captured 99% of all traffic going to and from the countries where terrorists were operating,  Instead, the NSA chose to put the wiretapping rooms at key junction points throughout the country, thus gaining access to not just international communications but to most of the domestic traffic flowing through the US.
But that’s not what they were after.  They wanted it all.  Why you may ask.  Well, allow me to explain to you why the government[‘s greatest fear is NOT terrorists; it is the American people who they fear will rise up and attempt to overthrow the existing order.

 

Whoa!  Wait a minute, Jeffry.  That’s a pretty bold statement!  What do you have to back it up.

 

Good question.  There are two parts to the asnwer:

PART I

PROJECT MINERVA:

Pentagon preparing for mass civil breakdown
Social science is being militarised to develop ‘operational tools’ to target peaceful activists and protest movements
A US Department of Defense (DoD) research program is funding universities to model the dynamics, risks and tipping points for large-scale civil unrest across the world, under the supervision of various US military agencies. The multi-million dollar program is designed to develop immediate and long-term “warfighter-relevant insights” for senior officials and decision makers in “the defense policy community,” and to inform policy implemented by “combatant commands.”
Launched in 2008 – the year of the global banking crisis – the DoD ‘Minerva Research Initiative’ partners with universities “to improve DoD’s basic understanding of the social, cultural, behavioral, and political forces that shape regions of the world of strategic importance to the US.”
Among the projects awarded for the period 2014-2017 is a Cornell University-led study managed by the US Air Force Office of Scientific Research which aims to develop an empirical model “of the dynamics of social movement mobilization and contagions.” The project will determine “the critical mass (tipping point)” of social contagions by studying their “digital traces” in the cases of “the 2011 Egyptian revolution, the 2011 Russian Duma elections, the 2012 Nigerian fuel subsidy crisis and the 2013 Gazi park protests in Turkey.”
Twitter posts and conversations will be examined “to identify individuals mobilized in a social contagion and when they become mobilized.”
Another project awarded this year to the University of Washington “seeks to uncover the conditions under which political movements aimed at large-scale political and economic change originate,” along with their “characteristics and consequences.” The project, managed by the US Army Research Office, focuses on “large-scale movements involving more than 1,000 participants in enduring activity,” and will cover 58 countries in total.
Last year, the DoD’s Minerva Initiative funded a project to determine ‘Who Does Not Become a Terrorist, and Why?’ which, however, conflates peaceful activists with “supporters of political violence” who are different from terrorists only in that they do not embark on “armed militancy” themselves. The project explicitly sets out to study non-violent activists:

“In every context we find many individuals who share the demographic, family, cultural, and/or socioeconomic background of those who decided to engage in terrorism, and yet refrained themselves from taking up armed militancy, even though they were sympathetic to the end goals of armed groups. The field of terrorism studies has not, until recently, attempted to look at this control group. This project is not about terrorists, but about supporters of political violence.”

The project’s 14 case studies each “involve extensive interviews with ten or more activists and militants in parties and NGOs who, though sympathetic to radical causes, have chosen a path of non-violence.”
I contacted the project’s principal investigator, Prof Maria Rasmussen of the US Naval Postgraduate School, asking why non-violent activists working for NGOs should be equated to supporters of political violence – and which “parties and NGOs” were being investigated – but received no response.
Similarly, Minerva program staff refused to answer a series of similar questions I put to them, including asking how “radical causes” promoted by peaceful NGOs constituted a potential national security threat of interest to the DoD.
Among my questions, I asked:
“Does the US Department of Defense see protest movements and social activism in different parts of the world as a threat to US national security? If so, why? Does the US Department of Defense consider political movements aiming for large scale political and economic change as a national security matter? If so, why? Activism, protest, ‘political movements’ and of course NGOs are a vital element of a healthy civil society and democracy – why is it that the DoD is funding research to investigate such issues?”
Minerva’s program director Dr Erin Fitzgerald said “I appreciate your concerns and am glad that you reached out to give us the opportunity to clarify” before promising a more detailed response. Instead, I received the following bland statement from the DoD’s press office:
“The Department of Defense takes seriously its role in the security of the United States, its citizens, and US allies and partners. While every security challenge does not cause conflict, and every conflict does not involve the US military, Minerva helps fund basic social science research that helps increase the Department of Defense’s understanding of what causes instability and insecurity around the world. By better understanding these conflicts and their causes beforehand, the Department of Defense can better prepare for the dynamic future security environment.”

In 2013, Minerva funded a University of Maryland project in collaboration with the US Department of Energy’s Pacific Northwest National Laboratory to gauge the risk of civil unrest due to climate change. The three-year $1.9 million project is developing models to anticipate what could happen to societies under a range of potential climate change scenarios.

From the outset, the Minerva program was slated to provide over $75 million over five years for social and behavioral science research. This year alone it has been allocated a total budget of $17.8 million by US Congress.

 

PART II

Operation Jade Helm 15, the July 2015 summer-long U.S. military training exercise in the Southwest that has stirred conspiracy theories of imminent martial law, kicked off Wednesday in Texas.
The operation, involving 1,200 service members, including Special Forces from all four branches, Marine expeditionary forces and the 82nd Airborne Division, is being conducted largely on private property.
The overall exercise will take place across Texas, Arizona, Florida, Louisiana, Mississippi, Utah and New Mexico.
The conspiracy theories began emerging in March and burst out publicly at local gatherings of the Bastrop County Commissioners court, where U.S. officials were bombarded with questions about the true purpose of the operation.
Fringe websites quickly suggested the operation was designed to lay the groundwork for martial law, a federal takeover of Texas — even the wholesale confiscation of guns.

WHAT DO YOU THINK NOW?

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmailby feather

If you appreciate my articles, please check out my books. I think you'll really enjoy them Just use the link below to go directly to my website.

www.politicalnovel.com

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *